Passenger Trains > Texas Eagle 22(28): final indignity

After being delayed by a collision with a truck just out of San Antonio, delaying it 2 1/2 hours  (https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,6096290),  and losing another 2 1/2 hours at Fort Worth for Mechanical Assessment, it limped into St. Louis 4 1/2 hours late.

There, lone unit AMTK 62 required further Mechanical Assessment which was briefly successful.  After an additional delay of over an hour, the Eagle flapped its wings and departed St. Louis, only to go lame in East St. Louis.

At that point, Amtrak gave up.  After another four hours, the poor Eagle was dragged into Chicago by Train 318(29).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/30/25 01:47 by GenePoon.

Yet another case where Amtrak violates its own policy of 2 locos on LD trains, only to have a complete fail happen once again.  

A serious question:  Does Amtrak have more cancellations due to equipment issues than the airlines?  My guess is yes, but I am not sure.  

So many people here seem to spend their time hitting refresh on Amtrak's delay tracker and then bury the lead (Train 22 towed by Train 318) on a story that's posted too late for anyone to go out and get a photo.

Amtrak policies aren't worth the paper they are written on.

Street-carring passengers with platform ticket scans are also against policy, as are crews hogging 3 or 4 dinette tables. It means nothing. 

"A serious question:  Does Amtrak have more cancellations due to equipment issues than the airlines?  My guess is yes, but I am not sure."

The airline cancelation rate because of mechanical failure...failure, not precautionary...is fairly low.  The problem with Amtrak is if a long distance train has a locomotive failure, there's no other alternative than a bus and that's not always a sure thing.  With air transportation, in most cases there's another airplane reasonably ready to accomodate delayed passengers.  By the way, how many times did the Super Chief get stranded enroute by a locomotive failure?  The Great Northern Empire builder?  The California Zephyr?  

Private railroads back in the day ran 3 to 5 E and F unit lashups, with a steam generator car during the winter.
Amtrak bean counters don't believe in positive redundancy since it would impact bonuses (which ought to be abolished entirely), so they tie up the Class I's almost every day, then play victim when the dispatchers don't respect them or take their operations seriously. 

We rail fans know the truth about the Western LD trains--
how they seriously disrupt people's lives with enormous delays.

Amtrak is lucky because the average traveler buying a ticket knows
nothing about the risk they are taking of incurring massive delays.

We can't expect Amtrak management to do anything because, addressing
this "mechanical assessment" problem involves increasing costs--which to
them means "Bonus Destruction".

Equipment issues enroute on Amtrak = delays , should a flight have equipment issues enroute with a plane it may equal a crash ;  always good to know that airlines have planes "available" at departure time . 

In the two years I worked for Amtrak as a mechanic I cannot remember a time that the Lone Star (train #15, nee-Texas Chief) arrived late due to engine trouble.  I don't remember a single rescue by freight engines or annulments hitting Houston.  Back then there were always two SD40PF pulling and the crew were Santa Fe staff, but the delays were mostly due to auto collisions or freight derailments or winter weather.  In my two years only 4-5 times #15 arrived extraordinarily late by over 4 hours for any cause.   So up until the time the SD40PF engine was suspected of causing derailments it was a dependable locomotive for the Lone Star.  The redundant policy of running two locomotives kept delays down significantly.  
 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/30/25 07:40 by Hou74-76.

ronald321 Wrote:
Amtrak is lucky because the average traveler buying a ticket knows nothing about the risk they are taking of incurring massive delays.

I think you are on the right track with this observation.  What percentage of the total traveling public on a given long distance segment outside of Autotrain travels by Amtrak, 1-2 percent I guess?  And what percentage of that are newbies or uninformed?  I have seen personally on the Texas Eagle, first time train travelers wishing to try Amtrak out.  There is a base out there of travelers Amtrak can count on who aren't aware of the short comings.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Private railroads back in the day ran 3 to 5 E and
> F unit lashups, with a steam generator car during
> the winter.

Where are those trains today? If they were so good, why don't they exist today?

Hint: They do not exist. They lost money. They were canceled by the private railroad or handed over to Amtrak.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amtrak bean counters don't believe in positive
> redundancy since it would impact bonuses (which
> ought to be abolished entirely)

I am actually in favor of bonuses. But they need to be based on different metrics, such as on-time performance and growing ridership and revenue.

The present bonus structure is crippling Amtrak IMO.

Chessie1963 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yet another case where Amtrak violates its own
> policy of 2 locos on LD trains, only to have a
> complete fail happen once again.  

What rule is this? I've never heard of it before. The Eagle, CONO and Cardinal all run with one engine. And have for years. 

I usually read these debates and smile, but don't respond.

Slightly off topic, I fly about 50,000 actual air miles a year. The planes are getting older. Can't tell you how many flights I've been on since COVID with at laest one non-functional bathroom, an out of service APU or some other less than perfect issue. I'm just hoping the main engine maintenance inspections are still respected!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/30/25 07:37 by RichM.

longliveSP Wrote:

> Where are those trains today? If they were so
> good, why don't they exist today?
>
> Hint: They do not exist. They lost money. They
> were canceled by the private railroad or handed
> over to Amtrak.

And they still lose money despite one high horsepower unit rather 3 F-7's. What is your point ? 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/30/25 08:07 by joemvcnj.

Good bonus and incentive programs are hard to implement effectively. And full of more "what about" than the U.S. Congress.

Set a target with $ for the operating dept for on time departures? Sure, but how about late starts due to late inbound?

Set a target with $ for mechanical but what about no parts because purchasing didn't bother to order them?

Set a target for purchasing but the supplier wants cash in advance?

The list goes on and on. Do you skip cleaning and pumping a late inbound to get an on time outbound?

Good bonus structures require thought and planning to achieve --multiple-- corporate objectives. Not just cut costs.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good bonus and incentive programs are hard to
> implement effectively. And full of more "what
> about" than the U.S. Congress.
>
> Set a target with $ for the operating dept for on
> time departures? Sure, but how about late starts
> due to late inbound?
>
> Set a target with $ for mechanical but what about
> no parts because purchasing didn't bother to order
> them?
>
> Set a target for purchasing but the supplier wants
> cash in advance?
>
> The list goes on and on. Do you skip cleaning and
> pumping a late inbound to get an on time
> outbound?
>
> Good bonus structures require thought and planning
> to achieve --multiple-- corporate objectives. Not
> just cut costs.

100% A good bonus program is not a simple thing to implement. And even after you do, it requires vigilance and regular tweaking to make sure you are getting what is desired.

I'm pretty sure Amtrak just plucked "cutting costs" and whatever other metric - implemented it and walked away. And then slowly the rot crept in.

The Eagle's been on-and-off with two units.  Right now, it's off.  If Amtrak and Siemens could get the Chargers running with reasonable reliability, I think it could be "on."  I believe there's something about special equipment need for units leading the Eagle, which I hear is why you usually only see units in the 50 and 60 series.

Requires the ITCS capability for CHI-STL similar to the Michigan line. Only a subset of P42s have it, whereas all of the Midwest Chargers have it. They would need to roll that out on a number of LD chargers to start, but I also heard there are issues getting DEF for refueling spots. For the Eagle, that's just in Fort Worth and Chicago (no fueling is done in San Antonio unless it's an emergency). So it seems FW would be the spot holding up the Eagle from converting (apart from the non-ITCS equipped units). 

There was a story 2 years ago where the solo unit crapped out in Hawkins, TX, on #21 when it was 100+ outside. Cars became an oven, and they had to get school buses to bus passengers over to the school gym to keep them out of the heat, then bus them to FW, where they would reboard the same set once it was dragged to FW by UP and the protection unit added. For what it's worth, on 10/19 there was a protect unit assigned back at FW #131.

sethamtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chessie1963 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yet another case where Amtrak violates its own
> > policy of 2 locos on LD trains, only to have a
> > complete fail happen once again.  
>
> What rule is this? I've never heard of it before.
> The Eagle, CONO and Cardinal all run with one
> engine. And have for years. 


Seth, I've seen this person write that numerous times this week and I was wondering the same as you.